[Health Care Threads merged - please stop creating new threads]

[ace2000]

I think you should all take your baseball gloves, bats and balls and go home. It is suppertime. Mom is calling.

Since I seem to be one of the few people on TUG discussing the ACA from the opposing side, I seem to be the whipping boy on this thread. It's ok, I can deal with it. It's obvious that this is a very emotional issue, and I can understand that.

I've also called out several inaccuracies and rebutted misinformation when I've seen it - that hasn't made me very popular. I've been open minded when others have done the same on my posts. Trust me, I'm not taking it personal, I think it's been a "healthy" debate.

 

[SMHarman]

I thought the source was a good read, and I learned from it. And I appreciate the other feedback to my comments. They have a pension mandate like no other, because they have a pension like few others. Are you saying it's a bad idea to pre-fund their commitment? I don't believe you are, but you have to factor in those long term costs somehow. There are several pension funds that are set up to be pre-funded in the same manner.

Most pensions should have some form of pre-funding. It's a big stretch for any of us to take comfort that our employer today will be around to write us retirement checks in 20-30 years. The question is how much. Scoop highlighted that they are making USPS get fully funded in 10 years. It's a bit like you taking out a 30 year mortgage and then being told a couple of years later to pay it off in 10 years but you can't sell the house. Just ramp up the capital reapayment.
Actuarially the timing of contribution vs the timing of withdrawal is off. This will likely mean that the Postal Service pension fund is massivly overfunded in 10 years time (cue the raid of the pension by the government).

I can tell you a big one for me on a personal basis. If I go to my local post office to mail something, I end up waiting in line for about 15 minutes... sometimes more, and sometimes less. UPS has always been a quick process for me.

If you want more than that, here's a link to eBay's comparison.

http://www.ebay.com/gds/Shipping-UPS-vs-USPS-/10000000001545951/g.html

I don't ignore it. I read it. I choose to comment, if I have something to say, as I did above. Sometimes, there's truth on both sides. This stuff isn't life or death.

The USPS now has a set of online tools as competetive as FedEx or UPS. Most of my parcel mailing does not have me go to the post office, they collect from me or I drop envelopes into the mail box.

Pre-funding a commitment seems reasonable, but doing so for the next 50 years within a 10 year span? That doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense.

As for medicare, IF it is indeed considered efficient, then why is there any reason to believe that universal healthcare would necessarily be any less efficient? Or effective for that matter? Efficiency and efficacy are matters of pragmatism, but when it gets right down to it, I imagine that most folks have an ideological perspective, and they subsequently layer in selective pragmatic arguments as it suits their fancy.

Exactly

 

[ace2000]

Pre-funding a commitment seems reasonable, but doing so for the next 50 years within a 10 year span? That doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense.

It does seem excessive. I guess the good news is since it passed in 2006, the 10-year span is almost over.

 

[Passepartout]

I can tell you a big one for me on a personal basis. If I go to my local post office to mail something, I end up waiting in line for about 15 minutes... sometimes more, and sometimes less. UPS has always been a quick process for me.

I went to UPS on Saturday armed with a tracking number to ask why they shipped a parcel addressed to me back to the shipper. It was addressed perfectly. They have delivered hundreds of parcels to me at the same address.

They were closed on Saturday. And Sunday.

The USPS was open Saturday, and it's lobby is open on Sunday, so if DW wants to check her P.O. Box, she can. UPS doesn't offer that service.

When I ship a package at the UPS store, there IS a line there. Don't tell me UPS is more efficient. Only costlier and less secure.

Now, to re-purchase the Amazon Gold Box item that UPS sent back to the shipper, I can buy it again, Amazon says. For $270 + freight, instead of the $130, shipped free on Amazon Prime.

Don't ask me how I feel about UPS today.:annoyed::annoyed::annoyed:

 

[Conan]

Speaking (when we were) of Fox News, here's today's Fox graphic. What's wrong with this picture?

 

[Beefnot]

Speaking (when we were) of Fox News, here's today's Fox graphic. What's wrong with this picture?

That is classic!

 

[Ken555]

That is classic!

Naw, they're just showing the tip of the iceberg...

And in all fairness, math isn't Fox News' area of expertise.


Sent from my iPad

 

[Passepartout]

Well, finally. Within the next couple of hours, anyone who wants health insurance this year will have signed up, or decided to pay the penalty for not doing so. I can't imagine that (regardless of what they might say) many can honestly say they were not aware.

Unfortunately, of those who remain uninsured, some will find out the hard way that they cannot buy insurance through ACA until November, and buying it outside ACA will be very expensive. In many cases, there are restrictions of what's covered. A few will go bankrupt because of medical bills. Sad.

My guess is that a large percentage of the uninsured are the same people who drive cars without insurance. We read about those in the newspaper every day.

Even with the botched roll-out, they came quite close to the goals set for year 1.

Jim

 

[Ken555]

Even with the botched roll-out, they came quite close to the goals set for year 1.

I just saw a news item that they may have hit 7 million. If so...let the spin begin!


Sent from my iPad

 

[ScoopKona]

The USPS was open Saturday, and it's lobby is open on Sunday, so if DW wants to check her P.O. Box, she can. UPS doesn't offer that service.

Here's the other thing. I'm tight with my USPS delivery dude. I've known him for years. His mother makes the best lumpia on the planet. You can't really build a relationship with the UPS driver or the FedEx driver. They come and go too quickly. Not so with the USPS guy/gal. He's been my mailman since the day we moved in.

Just two days ago, there was a note in my mailbox from my USPS delivery dude. "Got a package that didn't fit in the mailbox. Looked expensive. It's under the bush by your front door. If you don't pick it up by 4pm, I'll take it back and try again tomorrow."

That is government service.

 

[Beefnot]

Here's the other thing. I'm tight with my USPS delivery dude. I've known him for years. His mother makes the best lumpia on the planet. You can't really build a relationship with the UPS driver or the FedEx driver. They come and go too quickly. Not so with the USPS guy/gal. He's been my mailman since the day we moved in.

Just two days ago, there was a note in my mailbox from my USPS delivery dude. "Got a package that didn't fit in the mailbox. Looked expensive. It's under the bush by your front door. If you don't pick it up by 4pm, I'll take it back and try again tomorrow."

That is government service.

Then they get paid way too much.

 

[Ken555]

Here's the other thing. I'm tight with my USPS delivery dude. I've known him for years. His mother makes the best lumpia on the planet. You can't really build a relationship with the UPS driver or the FedEx driver. They come and go too quickly. Not so with the USPS guy/gal. He's been my mailman since the day we moved in.



Just two days ago, there was a note in my mailbox from my USPS delivery dude. "Got a package that didn't fit in the mailbox. Looked expensive. It's under the bush by your front door. If you don't pick it up by 4pm, I'll take it back and try again tomorrow."



That is government service.

Unfortunately, your experience is not universally shared as far as USPS is concerned. My local post office has management that likes to yell at customers, and I have regular issue with incorrect delivery of items (at least once per week or so I get a letter that was intended for another address and I return it...). I tell all vendors now that if they can't email me billing or other critical info I won't do business with them. Packages...fine...but UPS and Fedex are great and USPS is so-so.

It's time to take the delivery service discussion and put it in its own thread. It doesn't belong in the health care thread.


Sent from my iPad

 

[Tia]

It's time to take the delivery service discussion and put it in its own thread. It doesn't belong in the health care thread.


Sent from my iPad

YES too confusing

 

[ace2000]

I'm on board with leaving the post office discussion as is. I will say I've got a new appreciation for the USPS. Haven't changed my mind, but I have a deeper respect for the other side.

I'm firmly convinced that the current healthcare debate and it's future is a question of how are we best served - government run health care vs. private run health care.

The ACA tries to do both and that's one of the reasons I don't like it. My main concerns though are budget issues, which I've had the opportunity to express here several times.

The solution in my mind IS complete government health care. I'll say it again, it is a choice and tradeoff between the greedy corporate profit making insurance companies vs. the inefficient government bureaucracy and red tape. But, in the end I've concluded that health care is better served by our government.

I also know that I seem to be the only one on this thread that thinks that the government is less efficient than our corporations - or at least that chose to express it verbally. It appears that I'm far outnumbered, which is ok, at least we have learned who we are.

 

[ace2000]

I just saw a news item that they may have hit 7 million. If so...let the spin begin!

No spin here. The 7 million is significant because it's the number the original estimates were built off of. Other significant numbers are how many are actually enrolled and paid, how many were previously uninsured, and how many of the young population are in the mix.

To it's credit, the Obama administration did an incredible job marketing the program.

 

[Beefnot]

I also know that I seem to be the only one on this thread that thinks that the government is less efficient than our corporations - or at least that chose to express it verbally.

Wrong answer.

I don't necessarily believe the government is efficient at anything, even the post office (USPS is losing money hand over fist). But they are highly effective. There is a difference. Police, fire, military, mail, motor vehicles, etc. Local, state, and federal government provide generally very effective services, even if the are operated inefficiently.

 

[ace2000]

But based on the articles below, I will recant. USPS is a pretty doggone efficient organization all things considered.

Yea, perhaps so. But, then you recanted, so it's hard to really tell where you stand. I'm not sure what statement you were recanting then. I guess you meant only the post office. But, it really doesn't matter. I think people understood where I was coming from.

 

[bogey21]

Other significant numbers are how many are actually enrolled and paid, how many were previously uninsured, and how many of the young population are in the mix.

Other numbers we need before we can make a reasonable judgment as to the success of the ACA are premium increases or decreases the second year and the amount (if any) the taxpayer has to chip in to cover Insurance Company losses.

George

 

[Passepartout]

The solution in my mind IS complete government health care. I'll say it again, it is a choice and tradeoff between the greedy corporate profit making insurance companies vs. the inefficient government bureaucracy and red tape. But, in the end I've concluded that health care is better served by our government.

I also know that I seem to be the only one on this thread that thinks that the government is less efficient than our corporations - or at least that chose to express it verbally. It appears that I'm far outnumbered, which is ok, at least we have learned who we are.

I am confused, but not as confused as you seem to be. On the one hand you say that government bureaucracy and red tape and 'waste, fraud, and abuse' are a bad thing, yet a sentence or two later you espouse 'complete government healthcare'? This position seems different than where you began posting in this thread nearly a thousand posts ago. Back then (iirc) you wanted nothing short of 'repeal and re-do' Obamacare. We seem to have made some progress toward consensus.

In the last couple of pages here, you've tried to make a case for private enterprise doing a better job than government agencies. I am not disagreeing with you. You are just using the wrong examples. Try some others. Like Space-X vs. NASA. It may well be that the private rocket company will end up doing a better job of hauling stuff to orbit and maybe to Mars. We just don't know yet.

Yes, you DO seem to be nearly the only naysayer in the thread. I'm sure you have some kindred spirits here, just not so vocal. Surely you've received PM's with 'attaboy' messages. As you said, we know on which side of the issue we stand, and I suppose it defines us on some level. I noticed that we didn't exactly see eye-to-eye when we sat together over a Mai-Tai in Maui a few years back. After cocktails we went in different directions for dinner with more agreeable companions. Nonetheless, I'm glad we met.

Now, the time for argument is over. Those who want insurance this year have signed up. The political lines are drawn, to be taken back up in the Fall.

Step back, take a deep breath. Go on a vacation- or at least plan some.

Have a great Spring and Summer.

Jim

 

[ace2000]

Jim, let me clear it up for you on how it went down this path. Hopefully it will clear up your fog.

After this chain, I listed several government programs that I believe were not run efficiently (I don't want to list them again because I don't think we need to hash them out individually.) Then one program on my list became the focal point of yesterday's discussion. The strange thing is I never got a direct response to my question to SMHarman, only his post describing my question as a "straw man" when I quoted his exact post.

I personally think there should not be profit motive in health care, but that's where we are, ins execs can pocket millions in bonuses.

It's the evil profit motive vs. the inefficiencies and costs of another government program. I'm not taking a side on this, just saying there's advantages and disadvantages for both.

Please list these inefficient government programs. Most government programs operate more efficiently than similar private programs.

Maybe we need to understand where you're coming from. Can you provide a government program that DOES operate more efficiently as you have chosen to claim here ???

 

[ace2000]

I noticed that we didn't exactly see eye-to-eye when we sat together over a Mai-Tai in Maui a few years back. After cocktails we went in different directions for dinner with more agreeable companions. Nonetheless, I'm glad we met.

LOL - more fog and confusion. This one is more bizarre, and you're telling me to take a deep breath? What makes you think we met in Maui? I can promise you that wasn't me.

Now, the time for argument is over. Those who want insurance this year have signed up. The political lines are drawn, to be taken back up in the Fall.

Step back, take a deep breath. Go on a vacation- or at least plan some.

Have a great Spring and Summer.

Jim

Naw, it's far from over. One of my concerns about the ACA is that the plan is so poorly designed that we will have moved further away from a single payer plan.

 

[ace2000]

Back then (iirc) you wanted nothing short of 'repeal and re-do' Obamacare. We seem to have made some progress toward consensus.

I don't know what the reference to "iirc" is here. I have never called for "repeal" of the ACA, and I believe I've been consistent in this thread. My feelings haven't changed at all as you've described. Please provide any of my quotes to back your claim. I'll be willing to admit it if I'm wrong.

I do feel strongly that the ACA is going to have to be "re-done" in the future. I hope the under-26, the caps, and the pre-existing remain. I have no reason to think that those will ever go away, especially now that they're entrenched.

A big test will be the 2014 Fall elections. If the politicians see this as a losing issue, they'll run from the ACA faster than anything you've ever seen.

 

[Passepartout]

Seriously ??? Go down the list... Post Office, Medicare, Medicaid, Disability, Social Security. They all are notorious for being inefficient with fraud, waste, and abuse. Things happen in those programs that just don't happen in private enterprise.

Are you saying otherwise?

Just to refresh your memory. There ARE no equivalent civilian, private enterprises that do what these (yes) bureaucracies do. Period.

I did say that I don't disagree that there are some inefficiencies, but since these happen to be the only programs that do what these programs do, either offer some private outfits that overlap ALL the government services YOU cite, or find different examples. I cited one, Space-X vs NASA.

Oh, and again using your examples: USPS is a private corporation operation under federal mandate. At a profit. Medicaid is a federal program, overseen by the various states. And Disability and Social Security are insurance. Funded by that little FICA tax that comes out of either your paycheck (if you are self employed) or a 50/50% payment by you and your employer.

Could they be be more efficiently run? Probably, but how would you do that? Start another oversight agency? I doubt that's the answer.

You?

 

[ace2000]

Just to refresh your memory. There ARE no equivalent civilian, private enterprises that do what these (yes) bureaucracies do. Period.

I think we just talked about one example yesterday. I also provided another list in a different post. I purposely left that list out in my previous post and you chose to bring it up again - and I even described why. I'm ready to move on to the next topic, I think almost everyone else is too.

 

[Passepartout]

I don't know what the reference to "iirc" is here. I have never called for "repeal" of the ACA, and I believe I've been consistent in this thread. My feelings haven't changed at all as you've described. Please provide any of my quotes to back your claim. I'll be willing to admit it if I'm wrong.

I do feel strongly that the ACA is going to have to be "re-done" in the future. I hope the under-26, the caps, and the pre-existing remain. I have no reason to think that those will ever go away, especially now that they're entrenched.

A big test will be the 2014 Fall elections. If the Democrats see this as a losing issue, they'll run from the ACA faster than anything you've ever seen.

We may be parsing words here, but I construe "re-done" as being, if not the same, darn close to "repeal". But I am willing to give you the Mulligan on this.

We all (supporters of ACA) know there will be changes, adjustments, tweaks, re-do's, call them whatever you want, to get more people covered, at lower cost. Maybe it will be through increased penalties for the non-insured. Maybe it will be through advertising in more direct and creative ways to attract the 'young, invincibles' to prioritize healthcare into their budgets. It might be with targeted programs to recruit people whose English may be a second- or unknown- language. Underinsured segments will be identified, and targeted to be covered.

As to your comment re: the mid-term elections. Democrats will turn their backs on the hard-won ACA at their peril. Republicans made Obamacare the centerpiece of their efforts in the General Election year of 2012. It cost them plenty. Customarily, mid-terms give the opposite party (of the White House holder) gains. It may and probably will happen again. The number of paths for Republicans to take the Senate are greater than the number of paths the Dems have to re-take the House. The larger problem Republicans face is the splintering of that party. A divided Republican Party doesn't have a chance against it's own factions, let alone a united opposition.

But this is not an argument that belongs on TUG. I wouldn't be surprised to see that last paragraph disappear.